Is this the same clinton campaign that criticized Iowa's caucus procedures because of voter disenfranchisement? Really, how stupid do they think we are?

Bill needs to keep his mouth shut. He is only casuing more and more trouble and damaging the party. It is getting sickening.

"If turnout were incredibly low in the casino caucuses and incredibly high in the regular precinct caucuses, Clinton would be right in warning that votes cast in the at-large casino caucuses could be worth "five times, maybe even more" than votes cast at regular precinct caucuses, according to Bill Buck, a consultant to the Nevada Democratic Party."

I read the complaint - I'm not sure Bubba and company did their math right with regards to their Equal Protection issue. It doesn't effectively change the proportion with which delegates are assigned to have them given out per casino rather than for casinos as a whole. 1 delegate for every 50 voters times 10 casinos does not equal 1 candidate for every 5 voters - it's still 1 delegate for every 50 voters.

What are they talking about ?

Sam,

Here's their explanation. Though, honestly, I doubt there will be low turnout at the casinos; however, if I were to caucus with my boss, I would be intimidated:

If you only have 400 show up at every special precinct, that’s 9×80 delegates = 720 additional. Since Clark County contributes somewhere around 7k, the casino precincts are the extra 10% everyone refers to.

I have a feeling that ABCnews is bias favor of Obama.

Bill Clinton is one of the most self-centered gasbags on the planet. Like many other Americans, I have come to see him as a recurring bad joke. Some folks know when to shuffle gracefully off the stage, but as long as there are a few more first-person singular pronouns left in his ditty-bag he'll hang on to the spotlight as long as he can. Too bad for us, but at least we can still extract a few laughs from his robust obnoxiousness.

Why does it feel like its Bill running? Am I the only one sick of it? Maybe people should start asking him about his policies since its him running!

So, ABC, what happened to the video link on the home page for Bill's angry tirade against a student's question abou their campaign sueing to get the casino caucus's shut down? Did it make your candidate look bad? We all know he has a terrible temper and cusses up a storm like any sailor. He is so sick and slimy but oyu guys want to promote your establishment candidate(s) (the Hill/Bills)!

I would not want to vote with all the people who belong to a Union that supports a certain candidate. If I support another candidate, no way would I feel safe in that caucus. You are surrounded by union members of a Union who made a decision for you already. So much for the "Right to Vote." The whole caucus thing is social pressure. We feel we have a right not to share who we vote for, yet here are these people having to. at work no less, with the Union. Sounds completely wrong and UN-American.

Oh Defenders of Civil Rights, Equal Rights and Human Rights, please let the poor people vote.

Funny how no one thinks it's a trick to round up all the Union members to vote where they can be watched by other union members. You're defending your forced Obama votes. No one is naive enough to believe anything other than that fact.

One would tend to think that a former Governor, past President, and a current U.S. Senator who spouts 35 years of experience, (actually only seven as an officially elected U.S. Senator), would have lodged THEIR (I used their, because it appears Bill & Hillary are both running for president), complaints, when these documents were sent to each announced candidate in March. Why wait till less than two weeks before the caucus. This is rather reminiscent of a statement I've heard somewhere before. Seems to have something to do with the "Authorization to Use Military Force in Iraq" I think it was something like this. "I voted for the amendment, I didn't actually read the full intelligence report." How many more documents and intelligence reports will not be read till the last moment, and even then, by someone else.

"I'll vote for a team (Hill-Billy) that consistently kicks right-wing-hate-nut-jobs down the street all day long."

patrioticgrrl, that way of thinking is really alarming. You've clearly become such a wing nut yourself that you've lost perspective on what's truly right for the country. It's not okay to win at all costs, and if you haven't noticed, the Clintons aren't just dividing the nation along party lines now- they're even bitterly dividing the Democratic Party because of their gross lack of politcal ethics.

If you care about uniting the country (rather than further tearing it apart), please consider voting for Barack.

"If you only have 400 show up at every special precinct, that’s 9×80 delegates = 720 additional. Since Clark County contributes somewhere around 7k, the casino precincts are the extra 10% everyone refers to."
Posted by: patrioticgrrl

But doesn't Clark County encompass the strip, meaning that the precinct locations are still subject to the 1 to 50 assignment? The precincts get 1 delegate for every 50 votes. If 400 show up at every casino, they get 8 delegates apiece. For 9 precincts that means there are 72 delegates coming from 3600 caucus goers - the proportion would still be 1 to 50.

One other thing I meant to post in conjunction with the prior post, is the fact that not only was this Nevada plan sent to each candidate as early as March, but keep in mind the credentials of the candidates the documents were sent to. Three presently hold law degrees, Hillary, Obama, and Edwards. I didn't include Bill, because I'm not sure if he applied to get his license back in the state of Arkansas after his five year suspension, to avoid criminal prosecution, ended. I'm pretty sure he has never applied for a New York license. Besides that, he's not an officially declared candidate, (who can tell),so he wouldn't have been sent a copy. But, I would almost wager all of our money in China, that Edwards and Obama read the document.

patrioticgrrl, thanks for answering my question though!

Although when I read the complaint it sounded like they were claiming that because there were 9 separate precincts then the 1 to 50 was then reduced to 1 to 50 multiplied by 9 which would become 1 to 5. If that's what they were saying that means their math is wrong.

Why do Obama supporters only use insults against the Clintons and their supporters as a reason for voting? Oh yeah, there's the "He's a uniter" and "He represents change." Well good job parroting media propaganda. What else have you got, besides insults?

I read about this on another blog from a lady in NV about 5 days ago, but the media didn't bother to explain this. I am really starting to see that there is a greater agenda going on in the news. They keep omiting very relevant information that would allow voters to grasp the whole picture.

Clinton, Obama, Edwards, anybody is right in protesting this controlled setting for caucuses. They are being pressured to vote for Obama. I don't want Obama so fight it! You would be fools not to do the same were the shoe on the other foot. So stop pretending everyone!

Sam, the thresholds of people versus delegates is determined by the number of people who show up at each of the 9 casinos. So...

If only about 400, or 10 percent of the voters at each of the 9 Strip precincts show up, that could represent 80 delegates for each one, or (80 times 9) 720 delegates out of the about 7,200 alloted for Clark County. That's a hefty 10 percent right there.

But if the Culinary turns out just 20 percent of the voters in those Strip precincts, they could win about 1,450 delegates, or about 20 percent.

That is far and away a significant number, a magnified one that other areas of Nevada don't get.

According to the rules set out by the Democratic Party, the threshold for having an at large precinct location was 4000 workers who might caucus and couldn't get to their home precint.

That is the only number that can be used in court. 4000 caucus goers per precinct divided by 30, as the rules state, times 9 sites is 1197 delegates. 1197/10446 (other delegates) is 11.5% a significant amount of delegates selected in a manner that can easily be called INTIMIDATING and certainly NOT by any standard be considered NEUTRAL. The only number that could be used in the law suit is 4000 per precinct because we dont know how many will turn out.

If that proves the winning difference for Obama, you will have a big, big dispute...which means Big Media (ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, Fox, etc) will make even more millions on covering this crap.

Just scrap it and start doing secret ballot primaries that go for a complete day.